Say what you like about him but Froome is making today's stage one of the most spectacular days of racing in modern times (EuroSport's words not mine!)

Lone attack, 80km's out, nearly 2 minute gap on the virtual leader Dumoulin (Yates has completely imploded today and is nearly 20 minutes off the pace). Two tough climbs left to go but he's extended on the descent. So impressive. Even if today ultimately doesn't see him gain the Maglia Rosa, what a performance it would be.

I think if he can close the gap to Dumoulin today and attack tomorrow, who knows. I'd love him to do it.

Say what you like about him but Froome is making today's stage one of the most spectacular days of racing in modern times (EuroSport's words not mine!)

Lone attack, 80km's out, nearly 2 minute gap on the virtual leader Dumoulin (Yates has completely imploded today and is nearly 20 minutes off the pace). Two tough climbs left to go but he's extended on the descent. So impressive. Even if today ultimately doesn't see him gain the Maglia Rosa, what a performance it would be.

I think if he can close the gap to Dumoulin today and attack tomorrow, who knows. I'd love him to do it.

Edit: Gap now out to 2' 20" COME ON FROOMEY!

What, like he shouldn't be racing cause he's under drug investigation and will likely be stripped of any title anyway when his ban gets retrospectively applied?

Big, huge news today that all charges against Chris Froome have been dropped in a joint statement by WADA and the UCI. He’s stated his innocence from the first accusations broke and has had 9 months of hell. Hopefully he’ll now hit le Tour running and win another.

I could not be happier about this, he’s a true sporting great and a likeable guy too. Hopefully this will be the end of it and undoubtably the higher scrutiny on him going forward will prove he’s doing all of it without doping.

They've only dropped it cause of the potential scandal of the Tour not allowing him to ride. Too much cash involved and the timing is so iffy.

They need to explain exactly how thry came to the decision not to charge someone found with over twice the amount of salbutamol allowed, or start reinstating victories to the other riders with equally uncertain results; Contador for example.

See that was one of my first thoughts, having read that the Tour organisers were going to ban him. I agree the timing is convenient.

But then I remembered when he won the Giro, strong comments were made by the organisers pushing for a resolution before the Tour de France.

Well they got one, probably not the one they wanted but they got it.

Team Sky have said that it was only 19% higher, not double the amount as the press were widely reporting. Which was explained by kidney malfunction. They haven’t just dropped it for fun, especially considering how on the ropes Team Sky are at the moment. If they had a chance to bring the book down on them they would, of that I’ve no doubt.

He was dehydrated so his kidneys weren't functioning correctly and therefore he had a temporary buildup in that single test appears to be the reasoning that WADA are giving. The sad fact is that none of this should have been in the public domain - he's had a really shitty ride (no pun intended) as a result of what should have been confidential until a finding was confirmed. Almost like people want to kick the bloke

But the same happens to plenter of other riders. The difference here is that Team Sky, unlike many other teams, didn't immediately withdraw him from competition after an adverse finding. Other riders would still have been banned after being over the limit, regardless of the dehydration claim and temporary buildup of that drug.

Yates, for example, was banned for his doctor failing to fill out a form for his prescribed inhaler, it was covered for the rest of that particular race without any issue.

Contador's ban for tiny trace amounts of a drug that resulted in a two year ban and victories being stripped.

Tiernan-Locke was banned without failing any drug tests but for having an anomalous passport, which was also put down to dehydration from celebrating his Tour of Britain win.

The vitriol shown towards Wiggins over a package, despite no knowledge of what was in it nor any positive tests during a UCI Tour level event.

One rule for Froome; one rule for everyone else.

Oh and lets not forget that a certain Lance never failed any tests, let alone had to make up dehydration excuses....

[url="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/jul/02/froome-slow-process-lack-detail-annoy-organisers-experts" wrote:The Guardian[/url]
]Wada rules – as quoted in the organisations statement on the Froome case – specify that if Salbutamol is found over a certain threshold it “is presumed not to be an intended therapeutic use of the substance and will be considered as an AAF unless the athlete proves, through a controlled pharmacokinetic study, that the abnormal result was the consequence of the use of the therapeutic dose (by inhalation) up to the maximum dose indicated above”.